Litespeed

Bike wise- noise is our best friend. I find a rumbling V twin and a small blue led in the headlight makes the traffic split, like I am moses and the red sea. My nieghbours have complained of the 3am rides though. They must be upset as I changed from 2am. Can't please anybody these days.

Scott, I am shocked so much I am off topic. You Sir have been been replaced with a impostor in your avatar. Some lanky greying git has stolen your big smily likeness. Oh lord where art thou noble ape?

Damn, Phil You always stir up a Hornet's nest!

Very good idea, A cool but really tiny $20Million makes a massive difference in pilots and affordable fun. They just need to fast track the builds. This is chump change even to our Airforce. Imagine how cool the airforce would be if anyone serving could get airtime, and lots of it. All serviced and maintained by actual RAAF personnel and thus without a contractors artful bills. If the RAAF bought outright, self insures, cops the depreciation (hell they throw money money in BBQ's) and only charged for actual fuel and oil- bingo. You could get hours damn cheap, like $30 hour including service parts. Naturally all actual service pilots and navigators get free hours. All big heavy pilots need to keep intouch with the basics of aviation. And having lots of pilots on staff makes everything better. Imagine having a ground crew or avionics guy that also has 500hrs as PIC. Could make a much better airforce for bugger all cost. And having RAAF personnel using the company bird for joy flights is great cheap PR.

It is a Rolls Royce motor as well so is allowed the heads having the moniker- no fakes here. The M73 was used by Rolls Royce in the Silver Seraph 1998-2002.

This motor as you can see has cam drive for the ignition and normally has distributors. Or can be converted for magnetos. They are in stock form engineered for ignition and injection as separate systems for each bank of six. So even if ignition or injection fails on one complete side then you will still run as a complete six cylinder on the other side. That is a very handy attribute in a aircraft motor. So even with failure of one complete bank- you still have 170hp minus pump losses of the out bank, to get you safely home. The dead side is a drag but not a party killer with vibration. In a two tonne BMW 750 this motor will do 180km/hr on one side and 300km/hr with computers limiter off. The Mustang has that lovely cooling system scoop so it should be used. Sorry about the double video but damn it is double a Jabiru and triple a Rotax. If anyone is interested in a BMW M73 V12 for their project aircraft or Hotrod or sportscar or power boat. A mate I help with engines has these german masterpiece's brand new as 340hp. They can be built to your exact needs and standard have high torque cams and heads. They are chain driven heads- not belts. The build inside even a standard motor is beautiful and all forged parts. Pm me if interested.

A engine view and lovely sound. Ain't no pussy rotax or mini mouse Jabiru. Please notice how silky smooth the engine is, at any revs. A 60 degree V12 like this is beautifully balanced and a great candidate for a redrive without a lot of harmonic balance problems. The redrive is branded Titan. The Mustang has that lovely cooling system scoop so it should be used.

Do not muck about, put this in it.

Ah. Looks like the perfect candidate for a M73 V12 BMW motor with redrive. Could be easily done as long as pilot is happy to fly solo. Much better than a chev and the sound........... Given I have a shed of new ones to access- one could be built up and in airframe for less than a new rotax. Then a real nice big bladed prop and it would look, sound and go like a scale mustang or spitfire should.

Last magazine had such a chart from memory. The "life Hammer" is best as it has a tunsten tip and a blade to cut the webbing of seat belts.

Nobody, Yes, the RV6 will be going faster at cruise but we are talking about at near landing speeds. At landing speeds the differnce is all about the stall speed and the weight. RV6 is 1600lbs and stalls at 55 mph clean. J160 is 1180lbs and stalls 48 knots indicated with full flaps and 53 knts indicated clean. Both as per manufacturers spec sheets. The big difference is the weight and the design of the aircraft.

The Jabiru- A excellent example of the aircraft taking the G loads and its self sacrifice of airframe to reduce the loads impacted into the cockpit. Sadly the RV4 did not and fatality ensued. It obviously took some loads but not enough, no doubt the speed was probably higher as well.

That specimen would be HOMO Stupidis Eretcus

Myself, I would happily choose a bad landing/controlled low speed flight into trees/terrain in a Jabiru over almost anything and certainly over a GA aircraft. Yes, it has a smooth ground only front wheel assembly but that will breakaway and reduce the inertia and hence G load on the pilot. Time and again the Jabiru has proven to be a extremely strong little aircraft when it all goes pearshaped. We must remember that there have been no fatalities in a Jabiru unless it hits terrain at cruising speed. Many a pilot has walked away with no or little injuries due to the strength of a Jabiru. And No I do not own one or have a vested interest.

As a side note: The M73 BMW v12 has also most famously been used in the replica of the Vickers Vimy that was built by Australian and American enthusiasts to retrace the three big flights by the Smith brothers in their Vimy. A M73 (5.4 litre) was used with a special gearbox on each side and turned a huge prop. These engines replaced the big block chevs that proved unsuitable. Sadly due to a lawsuit from BMW USA the plane a was grounded in Meza , Arizona. This was not a reliability issue but lawyers suing in case BMW USA was held accountable if the Vimy crashed. And a case of lawyers ruining a perfectly good aircraft. Subsequently the engines were replaced with new Orenda OE 600's to allow it to continue flying out of the USA. A sad end to a great use of the M73 as a vintage aircraft engine.

That is a lovely motor and perfectly suited for its application. It is a M70 V12 5litre. They were used in the 750 BMW limos, or it could be the later M73 which had 340hp rather than 300hp. Both had incredible torque and smooth enough to balance a 50cent piece on it side. A friend has 2 M70 and 3 brand new M73 in his workshop ready for car projects. They were on pallets and were damaged by a idiot forklift driver- easily fixed. Cost was $300 each. They are all alloy block and heads, and have separate injection and ignition for each bank. So will run on 6 if one system fails completely. They are actually a very compact engine for a V12 and weigh only the same as the iron block 2.5 liter six.

I would think that as a pilot that was involved in 11 deaths and many more injuries- he would be haunted no matter what the gutter press say. I also think the blame lies at his feet but time will tell. I also think he should have tried to change his path away from the cars when it all seemed lost. Yes that would be fatal to him but it may have resulted in no other deaths. I do not know if that was posible but should have been tried. The golden rule in my mind is do not take others with you.

In my family who started on the land as sheep farmers, any dog that had a "taste" was immediately put down. Once they have tasted they will revert to genetic programming and do it again. And can not be trusted with livestock or children. Sad but true. But you could always test the dog to check. Here is a idea for the kiddies.................. https://www.google.com.au/search?q=child+in+sheep+suit&rlz=1C1FGGD_enAU609AU610&espv=2&biw=853&bih=473&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ved=0CBsQsARqFQoTCIvDq5q8r8gCFUcxpgodVpgIlA#imgrc=dPP5nlWGr852JM%3A Might not be popular with the parents though.

Dear Admin, As we have requested - please change the title to something that reflects the actual known circumstances of the incident. Ie: Jabiru has forced landing cause under investigation. This is a fairness issue. And not a form of censorship. Even if it was not a well known manufacturer will ongoing issues with CASA, which it could be interpreted as unwarranted. The continued misrepresentation of issues with Jabiru or any other manufacturer, does a great disservice to us all as sport pilots and to RAAus and this very forum site. Also unfairly targets owners of Jabiru aircraft and the value of their aircraft. We have been previously been told to not be too political due to ability to be sued- the same goes for this issue. And is far more relevant to our sport. Think of all of us, our sport, our aircraft, our RAAus and your precious website. Then think about Jabiru, all they have done for our expanding sport. The title smells of witch hunt. And it portrays us all very badly.

For the sake of the truth and the undeserved attention such a title creates can we have the thread name changed. Please ADMIN.

woops missed the image

Bugger, I stand corrected but as the facts do not represent the truth as I wish it. I will take the do a Abbott and make my own truth. Besides this looks much cooler and sounds correct.

Yes, similar size in some respects but a lot lower speeds and naturally a lower MTOW as no pilot needed. For me I would build a cri cri and have lots of fun. specs for 40% Beaver Scale: 1:2.5 (40%) Wingspan: 5.85 m Length: 3.69 m Height: 1.10 m Empty Weight: 87.1 kg Takeoff Weight: 91.3 kg Speed range: 20 to 60 mph Radio: Futaba FX-30 2.4 GHz Engine: Moki S400 5-cylinder radial (4-stroke gasoline engine) Cri Cri Crew: one Length: 3.9 m (12 ft 10 in) Wingspan: 4.9 m (16 ft 1 in) Wing area: 3.1 m2 (33 sq ft) Airfoil: Wortmann 21.7 Empty weight: 78 kg (172 lb) Max takeoff weight: 170 kg (375 lb) Powerplant: 2 × JPX PUL 212 single-cylinder piston engines, 11 kW (15 hp) each Propellers: 2-bladed Performance Maximum speed: 220 km/h (137 mph; 119 kn) Cruise speed: 185 km/h; 115 mph (100 kn) Range: 463 km; 288 mi (250 nmi) Service ceiling: 3,700 m (12,139 ft) Rate of climb: 6.6 m/s (1,300 ft/min) Wing loading: 55 kg/m2 (11 lb/sq ft)

After 30 plus years of riding, I could not recommend most bike engines. Even with a gearbox most are designed for a constantly changing rev rate not what a aircraft needs. But and the is always a but- the classic flat twin BMW motors are quite suitable. They do not have to rev hard for good power and are built to sustain high speeds for long distances. No they are not the lightest or most powerful but are damn near bullet proof. The older BMW r series had a orange line for maximum sustained revs for long periods and a redline for maximum revs about 7 % higher. They were the first bike engines to be designed for sustained revs all day long, day after day after day. They were engineered to a standard not a price point. At 75% power, fast cruise for a aircraft or road bike they will do it for a easy 1000-1500hrs. Just service it well and don't expect it to be a race bike engine. They are push rod and simple to work on, the opposite of almost any other bike engine. The other been a Moto Guzzi engine very similar inside but V twin and crap electrics. Mechanical failure is almost unheard of and is user/mechanic caused not the design or inherent quality of the beast. Removal and replacement of a head and barrel in the bike is a 30-60 minute job- that is after a huge amount of Kms. The BMW R series air cooled and later much more powerful oil cooled injected motors are very popular in europe and are found on all sorts of aircraft. A good motor and box combo for a aircraft is a small fraction of the cost of a rotax. And a rebuild cost peanuts compared as well. The four cylinder BMW K series (injected) is a bit heavy but is known as the "brick" and if cared for is also almost impossible to kill. At 300,000 kms they might be down on power a little but still just keep going. Even though a four cylinder they are very punchy in torque and only rev to 7300. Very under-stressed and the opposite of almost all other bike engines. They are designed to be easily serviced not a nightmare like most. They come from a period when Germany had a gentlemans agreement of no more than 100hp, so designed for tough and smooth not next years marketing headline. The BMW bike engines have the big bonus of a separate gearbox so are a relatively easy match to a rotax or similar gearbox. The crank is hefty and the bearings particularly the output side are very robust. Strong enough to take direct prop loads, not that you would as a gearbox is the go. The R1 yamaha is a lovely bit of kit but is race orientated and the last thing I want turning a prop. Remember you life depends on the engine to keep turning not just outright power for a short buzz.